Class Notes (839,150)
Australia (1,845)
Law (441)
JSB171 (400)
All (349)
Lecture

LWB238 - Wk5 - Forgery & Uttering & Personation

3 Pages
85 Views

Department
Law
Course Code
JSB171
Professor
All

This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full 3 pages of the document.
Description
Forgery & Uttering Definition/Punishment: WRITE: Forgery and uttering is defined/created and punished in s488 (1) CC as when a person, with the intent to defraud, forges a document or utters a forged document and is punished by 3 years imprisonment, unless aggravated in special cases. For aggravation see page 698 of Carters if question asks. N.B. s488 (2) Subsection (1) applies whether or not the document is complete and even though it is not, or does not purport to be , binding in law. Is the document forged? Is it a document? Definition – Document – s1: (1) Anything on which there is writing; and (2) Anything on which there are marks, figures symbols, codes, perforations or anything else having a meaning for a person qualified to interpret them; and (3) A record Is it a forged document? Definition – Forge – s1: “Forge” a document means make, alter or deal with the document so that the whole of it or a material part of it – (a) purports to be what, or of an effect that, in fact it is not; or (b) purports to be made, altered or dealt with by a person who did not make, alter or deal with it or by or for some person who does not, in fact exist; or (c) purports to be made, altered or dealt with by authority of a person who did not give that authority; or (d) otherwise purports to be made, altered or dealt with in circumstances in which it was not made, altered or dealt with. Not enough for document to tell a lie, it must be a lie itself: Kolence (used a factious name not enough). Has [accused] uttered? Definition – Utter – s1: “Utter” means and includes using or dealing with, and attempting to induce any person to use, deal with, or act upon, the thing in question. N.B. Questions of materiality and falsity are for the jury and subject to the qualification that in that in appropriate circumstances the judge should either withdraw the case from the jury or going to the other extreme, direct them that if certain facts are proved the only findings reasonably open will be ones of falsity and materiality: Brott Has [accused] intended to defraud by forging or uttering? Has [accused] intended to defraud? In relation to [false pretences] an intent to defraud must mean an intent to deprive another of property by deceit intent may exist even though the offender may intend to return the property: Balcombe v De Simoni Essential that he intended to
More Less
Unlock Document

Only page 1 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

Unlock Document
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version

Unlock Document

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit